This type of data does require better a better explanation than just 'contacts'. There are many examples. If you look at figure 18, the warrior with the La Tene type shield, it is probably very similar to the sheilds found at Hjortspring,

So the supposition is that U106 may have met folks (such as I1, R1a1, P312*) from Scandinavia just south of the Jutland to form the Jastorf culture.

Jastorf beings around 700 BC? U106 is about 4000 years old? So the corollary of your supposition is that U106 was contained east of the Oder River for its first 1300 years? And that lines up with variance figures?

Remember, this is all just a speculative inquiry but it is based on STR diversity being higher in Poland than Germany and being similar in both England and Scandinavia. Scandinavian U106 does not look old.

Yes, there is a corollary that U106 was not in the Jutland or at the neck of the Jutland or points west or north, to any significant degree, prior to the Jastorf expansion. It could have been either east or south. I don't know which. That's not too hard to imagine, if you think the R-L11 family (L11*, U106, P312) originated in SE Europe, the Steppes or SW Asia.

Good news for Maliclavelli. This is from a U106 project admin from the U106 forum today.

This is unusual, since about 40-50% of U106+ men are also L48+. That says something about the origin in northern Europe of the North Italian U106 lines and about the migrations that brought them there, although I'm not sure what it's saying. (It's fairly well-established that R1b-U106 and subclades are mainly a northern European haplogroup.) In contrast, all 3 U106+ lines from Sicily (including me) that I know about are also L48+.

It would be very worthwhile for you to test Z18 and Z381 from the Advanced Orders menu to establish if you belong in one of those subclades. Those two SNPs are not yet included in the deep clade test.

There is some genetic evidence that U106 could have been south of Jastorf area prior to its formation.

So the supposition is that U106 may have met folks (such as I1, R1a1, P312*) from Scandinavia just south of the Jutland to form the Jastorf culture.

Jastorf beings around 700 BC? U106 is about 4000 years old? So the corollary of your supposition is that U106 was contained east of the Oder River for its first 1300 years? And that lines up with variance figures?

Remember, this is all just a speculative inquiry but it is based on STR diversity being higher in Poland than Germany and being similar in both England and Scandinavia. Scandinavian U106 does not look old.

Yes, there is a corollary that U106 was not in the Jutland or at the neck of the Jutland or points west or north, to any significant degree, prior to the Jastorf expansion. It could have been either east or south. I don't know which. That's not too hard to imagine, if you think the R-L11 family (L11*, U106, P312) originated in SE Europe, the Steppes or SW Asia.

Good news for Maliclavelli. This is from a U106 project admin from the U106 forum today.

This is unusual, since about 40-50% of U106+ men are also L48+. That says something about the origin in northern Europe of the North Italian U106 lines and about the migrations that brought them there, although I'm not sure what it's saying. (It's fairly well-established that R1b-U106 and subclades are mainly a northern European haplogroup.) In contrast, all 3 U106+ lines from Sicily (including me) that I know about are also L48+.

It would be very worthwhile for you to test Z18 and Z381 from the Advanced Orders menu to establish if you belong in one of those subclades. Those two SNPs are not yet included in the deep clade test.

There is some genetic evidence that U106 could have been south of Jastorf area prior to its formation.

LOL - yes, the co-admin of the Italy project that pointed that out to Mike M. was me. To further the comment, it looks like DYS390=24 is also modal for U106 in all of southern Europe (Spain, Italy and the Balkans) and a large part of France.

I wrote many letters to MMaddi from when I wrote on Rootsweb, before my banishment at the end of 2007, and I said that also about R-U106, thought by everybody of German origin, we couldn’t be sure, because we couldn’t exclude an origin in the Italian Refugium also of this haplogroup. And this was based on my knowledge of Francesco Cesaroni, on the knowledge of the origin of his family and of his surname, then other thing rather than my “nationalism”. Also in this case only scientific analyses. Of course I am not sure and cannot exclude that this haplogroup has reached Italy with the Germans, but I invited not to take anything for granted. I have analysed also the case of the Brazilian of Italian descent Zeni, he R-U106 too.

we couldn’t be sure, because we couldn’t exclude an origin in the Italian Refugium also of this haplogroup.

We could, if we have zero evidence that this haplogroup is as old as the Ice Age, from which the undoubtedly lovely and culturally important Italian peninsula was supposedly a refuge for the yet-to-be born R1b haplogroup.

The Romans, bless their hearts, imported slaves, soldiers, tutors, diplomatic hostages, seamen and merchants (at least) from places far to the east -- in which R1b was probably found long before it was found in that peninsula -- according to almost every academic source in print, or nationalistic fantasy found online, except this one. Which I continue to doubt, as unsupported, unless and until something supports it. Several closely related P312* people in present-day Tuscany do not constitute support for a Peopling of Everywhere theory that is otherwise wildly hypothetical, and out of step with the mainstream.

The Jastorf culture was about contemporary with Romulus and Remus, it wasn't at the dawn of the Bronze Age. I don't have a problem with assigning high genetic status to Jastorf people -- nor to the aforementioned Roman imports, the Sea People, or other persons resident in present Italy -- after the haplogroup in question existed. Those P312* Tuscans, or U106* guys, probably do represent remnants of early, successful, and remarkably resilient lineages. Maybe even from 5,000 years ago -- wherever they may have lived, way back then.

we couldn’t be sure, because we couldn’t exclude an origin in the Italian Refugium also of this haplogroup.

We could, if we have zero evidence that this haplogroup is as old as the Ice Age, from which the undoubtedly lovely and culturally important Italian peninsula was supposedly a refuge for the yet-to-be born R1b haplogroup.

The Romans, bless their hearts, imported slaves, soldiers, tutors, diplomatic hostages, seamen and merchants (at least) from places far to the east -- in which R1b was probably found long before it was found in that peninsula -- according to almost every academic source in print, or nationalistic fantasy found online, except this one. Which I continue to doubt, as unsupported, unless and until something supports it. Several closely related P312* people in present-day Tuscany do not constitute support for a Peopling of Everywhere theory that is otherwise wildly hypothetical, and out of step with the mainstream.

The Jastorf culture was about contemporary with Romulus and Remus, it wasn't at the dawn of the Bronze Age. I don't have a problem with assigning high genetic status to Jastorf people -- nor to the aforementioned Roman imports, the Sea People, or other persons resident in present Italy -- after the haplogroup in question existed. Those P312* Tuscans, or U106* guys, probably do represent remnants of early, successful, and remarkably resilient lineages. Maybe even from 5,000 years ago -- wherever they may have lived, way back then.

I would caution that those currently identified as P312* or U106* don't necessarily represent older lineages of those subclades. All the * indicates is that their defining SNP hasn't been discovered yet. When it is discovered, it could well be younger than the other currently known subclades below P312 and U106. If those who believe SNPs occur every generation or two are correct, then true P312* and U106* doesn't exist in the present day.

Who knows me knows that I don’t like who hides himself. I am seeing only that your plant secerns poison. What do I know of you? Only that you are R-Z196*. You may be everything and nothing. Like Farinata asked Dante, I say: “Chi fur li maggior tui?”. Tell me, and you’ll get the answer you merit.

I would caution that those currently identified as P312* or U106* don't necessarily represent older lineages of those subclades.

I was trying to give Gioiello the benefit of the doubt. Guess it's just my irenic nature. Anyway, if they represent old lineages, that's about how old -- not the Ice Age -- and not necessarily born where they are now found, in Tuscany.

So the supposition is that U106 may have met folks (such as I1, R1a1, P312*) from Scandinavia just south of the Jutland to form the Jastorf culture.

Jastorf beings around 700 BC? U106 is about 4000 years old? So the corollary of your supposition is that U106 was contained east of the Oder River for its first 1300 years? And that lines up with variance figures?

Remember, this is all just a speculative inquiry but it is based on STR diversity being higher in Poland than Germany and being similar in both England and Scandinavia. Scandinavian U106 does not look old.

Yes, there is a corollary that U106 was not in the Jutland or at the neck of the Jutland or points west or north, to any significant degree, prior to the Jastorf expansion. It could have been either east or south. I don't know which. That's not too hard to imagine, if you think the R-L11 family (L11*, U106, P312) originated in SE Europe, the Steppes or SW Asia.

Good news for Maliclavelli. This is from a U106 project admin from the U106 forum today.

This is unusual, since about 40-50% of U106+ men are also L48+. That says something about the origin in northern Europe of the North Italian U106 lines and about the migrations that brought them there, although I'm not sure what it's saying. (It's fairly well-established that R1b-U106 and subclades are mainly a northern European haplogroup.) In contrast, all 3 U106+ lines from Sicily (including me) that I know about are also L48+.

It would be very worthwhile for you to test Z18 and Z381 from the Advanced Orders menu to establish if you belong in one of those subclades. Those two SNPs are not yet included in the deep clade test.

There is some genetic evidence that U106 could have been south of Jastorf area prior to its formation.

I have pointed out a couple of times that the northern Italian U-106 predominantly has DYS390=24. No one beside Rich R. and myself seems to think it has any significance. According to the U106 project administrators, 390=24 is the oriiginal value for U106. 390=23 apparently only developed in the later Z301 subclade, which includes L48, the most common U106 subclade. It could be an indication of an early arrival of U106(xZ301) in northern Italy.

So the supposition is that U106 may have met folks (such as I1, R1a1, P312*) from Scandinavia just south of the Jutland to form the Jastorf culture.

Jastorf beings around 700 BC? U106 is about 4000 years old? So the corollary of your supposition is that U106 was contained east of the Oder River for its first 1300 years? And that lines up with variance figures?

Remember, this is all just a speculative inquiry but it is based on STR diversity being higher in Poland than Germany and being similar in both England and Scandinavia. Scandinavian U106 does not look old.

Yes, there is a corollary that U106 was not in the Jutland or at the neck of the Jutland or points west or north, to any significant degree, prior to the Jastorf expansion. It could have been either east or south. I don't know which. That's not too hard to imagine, if you think the R-L11 family (L11*, U106, P312) originated in SE Europe, the Steppes or SW Asia.

Good news for Maliclavelli. This is from a U106 project admin from the U106 forum today.

This is unusual, since about 40-50% of U106+ men are also L48+. That says something about the origin in northern Europe of the North Italian U106 lines and about the migrations that brought them there, although I'm not sure what it's saying. (It's fairly well-established that R1b-U106 and subclades are mainly a northern European haplogroup.) In contrast, all 3 U106+ lines from Sicily (including me) that I know about are also L48+.

It would be very worthwhile for you to test Z18 and Z381 from the Advanced Orders menu to establish if you belong in one of those subclades. Those two SNPs are not yet included in the deep clade test.

There is some genetic evidence that U106 could have been south of Jastorf area prior to its formation.

I have pointed out a couple of times that the northern Italian U-106 predominantly has DYS390=24. No one beside Rich R. and myself seems to think it has any significance. According to the U106 project administrators, 390=24 is the oriiginal value for U106. 390=23 apparently only developed in the later Z301 subclade, which includes L48, the most common U106 subclade. It could be an indication of an early arrival of U106(xZ301) in northern Italy.

390=24 is modal for Z18 as well of course. As yet we haven’t found an Italian Z18 and it would be interesting if one or two of these people tested for it, but I think they should probably testing Z381 first.

.... I have pointed out a couple of times that the northern Italian U-106 predominantly has DYS390=24. No one beside Rich R. and myself seems to think it has any significance. According to the U106 project administrators, 390=24 is the oriiginal value for U106. 390=23 apparently only developed in the later Z301 subclade, which includes L48, the most common U106 subclade. It could be an indication of an early arrival of U106(xZ301) in northern Italy.

I'm with you on that. I was not aware of 390=24 in Italy but Maddi has said for years that 390=24 is modal in Poland and I've often repeated that.

However, I will say, one STR is not enough to bet too much on. Now, if 390=24 AND 492=12 were modal for U106 somewhere.. that would be something.

I guess FTDNA is giving Niall badges based on the 12-marker haplotype?

BTW, the guy I mentioned above who turned out to be M222+ in the end is now one of my Family Finder matches. Small world.

It is indeed, all my matches are Americans, bit like most of my STR matches. I do have a couple from the UK, at last, so maybe I am a Brit after all :)

I have at least two Family Finder matches who are British citizens. My M222+ Family Finder match is an Irishman (at least by descent; I don't recall whether or not he is an American).

Back on the Germanic/U106 thing, I notice the Z18 Project has grown quite a bit and now takes in a lot of continentals.

I also noticed kit 130720 lists Peter Sandifer as mdka. It says he died in Mississippi. I wonder if that would be Pike County, Mississippi. My family lived there after the Civil War, in and near Magnolia. The Sandifers were early pioneers in Pike County.

I guess FTDNA is giving Niall badges based on the 12-marker haplotype?

BTW, the guy I mentioned above who turned out to be M222+ in the end is now one of my Family Finder matches. Small world.

It is indeed, all my matches are Americans, bit like most of my STR matches. I do have a couple from the UK, at last, so maybe I am a Brit after all :)

I have at least two Family Finder matches who are British citizens. My M222+ Family Finder match is an Irishman (at least by descent; I don't recall whether or not he is an American).

Back on the Germanic/U106 thing, I notice the Z18 Project has grown quite a bit and now takes in a lot of continentals.

I also noticed kit 130720 lists Peter Sandifer as mdka. It says he died in Mississippi. I wonder if that would be Pike County, Mississippi. My family lived there after the Civil War, in and near Magnolia. The Sandifers were early pioneers in Pike County.

I'm pretty sure all my matches are Americans. Really I need to put more time into that but finishing off the family tree on my mothers side is proving a little time consuming. My plan was to get 6 generations down on all lines but I'm getting into pre census days and a lot of very common Welsh names, so far 3 Davies lines, 3 Morgans, 2 Thomas and 2 Parry, no point mentioning all the singletons but Jones crops up of course :)

When I email the Sandifers next I'll try and remember to ask about Pike County. I expect it is the same family it's not a particularly common name, least ways not this side of the pond.